R v Keogh (No 3)

In *R v Keogh (No 3)*, the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria considered the admissibility of a report prepared by Professor Barrie Vernon-Roberts. The applicant sought to admit this report into evidence, while the respondent contested its admissibility.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the report constituted a business record under section 45A of the *Evidence Act*, and whether it contained statements of fact, including opinions, that were admissible under section 45B of the *Evidence Act*. The Court also had to consider the evidentiary value of the document and the potential prejudice to the respondent arising from the inability to cross-examine the author, weighed against the interests of justice.

The Court reasoned that the report was a business record as it was prepared in the course of the regular business of a government instrumentality. Furthermore, it was an apparently genuine document containing statements of fact and opinions held by the author, whose qualifications and experience were sufficient to support his expert opinions. The Court found that any prejudice from the inability to cross-examine the author was slight, particularly as other expert witnesses had reviewed the report and reached similar conclusions, and cross-examination on those conclusions had proven unsuccessful. The Court concluded that admitting the document was in the interests of justice.

Consequently, the Court ordered that the report of Professor Barrie Vernon-Roberts be admitted into evidence pursuant to sections 45A and 45B of the *Evidence Act*. The Court deemed it unnecessary to consider the admissibility of the document under section 34KA of the *Evidence Act* given its determination under the other sections.